From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753208Ab2CCQNm (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Mar 2012 11:13:42 -0500 Received: from lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk ([81.2.110.251]:42973 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750942Ab2CCQNk (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Mar 2012 11:13:40 -0500 Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:15:37 +0000 From: Alan Cox To: "Arend van Spriel" Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] compat: makes all compat symbols EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() Message-ID: <20120303161537.0b4ac739@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <4F52141C.2050808@broadcom.com> References: <1330729706-11113-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@frijolero.org> <4F52141C.2050808@broadcom.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.8; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Face: 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 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Some of the modules in this patch are dual-licensed. I was under the > impression that EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL was specifically for GPL-only code > although I could not find any specifics in the Documentation folder. Do > you (or someone else) have a reference on this topic? If your code is licensed GPL or greater rights then you shouldn't have a problem. The module loader recognizes "GPL" "GPL v2" "GPL and additional rights" "Dual BSD/GPL" "Dual MIT/GPL" "DUal MPL/GPL" as legitimate users of _GPL. Any work which is derivative of the kernel (which in practise I suspect means almost any module) will need a GPL compatible licence anyway.